I'm going to weigh in on this one a little bit. My apologies if I come off
a little stronger than the previous objections did -- hopefully everyone
can see this matter from a rational viewpoint as I observe it. I really do
not get the point of this effort either, even after the explanation. How
is
Hi Nathan, Hi Brian,
First, I have to say that I'm sorry for having kept Etk secret and send
it to the CVS without any notification, it was probably the worst way to
proceed.
Now, the reasons why I have started Etk: as I always said, I wasn't
fully satisfied with ewl because it didn't worked
I'm getting a segv on etk_test here (bt below). I have to agree with
Nathan though. I definitely see nothing wrong with implementing your own
toolkit. However, we could probably get ALOT more done if we pooled our
efforts instead of constantly redoing things. I am curious also, as to
what faults
I also get the segfault with etk_test, though the backtrace is slightly
different, so here's mine:
#0 0x2d193c7e in ecore_str_hash () from /usr/lib/libecore.so.1
#1 0x2d18bce0 in ecore_hash_remove () from /usr/lib/libecore.so.1
#2 0x2d18b9d1 in ecore_hash_get () from
MoOm,
It looks like you've put considerable effort into this already. It
doesn't bother me that you wanted to write your own toolkit rather than
use EWL, everyone has their own API style and approach to specific
problems. That being said, I am bothered by the fact dj2 and I asked
you numerous
